December 4, 2015 she inserted her finger into the vagina of a 4 year old girl, causing pain. The girl complained, and a medical exam confirm she was sexually assaulted.

The sexual assault consists of Caitlin inserting her fingers into the vagina of a 4 year old girl.

While specifics have not been released, if the 4 year old girl had been clothed what must have happened?

Obviously Caitlin must have removed her pants, then her undies, and then insert her finger into the little girl's vagina, then redressed her.

Suppose they could test the DNA of the clothing, and also look for other types of trace evidence such as fiber.

What would forensics and DNA experts find?

Suppose they find Caitlin's DNA on both side of this 4 year old girl's longjohns, close to her waist band, and DNA on her panties, mixed in with the 4 year old girl's blood.

What conclusions would you draw?

How does this compare with this person

pictures of Jonbenet

who was sexually assaulted that night she died?

Now, the 4 year old girl is alive and stated exactly what happened. Jonbenet Ramsey is dead. but based on the injuries and blood found, medical experts conclude Jonbenet Ramsey was sexually assaulted on the night she died.

Based on what Catitlin Morrison did, Jonbenet's sexual assault could be as simple as inserting an index finger into the vagina.

Now, the news reports do not state if DNA or fiber was found or tested for, since the 4 year old girl is still alive. But if they test the 4 year longjohns and find DNA, female DNA on both sides by the waist band, and they find blood on the 4 year old girl's underwear, and in that blood is DNA of another female, what conclusion would you draw? Esp if this DNA matches Caitlin Morrison?

What conclusions can be drawn when applied to Jonbenet Ramsey?

Suppose Caitlin Morrison denied having any contact with the 4 year old girl. She denies it. So the DA's office and forensics does dna testing on clothing. They find DNA that matches Caitlin on both sides of the 4 year year old girl's longjohns. This 4 year old girl underwear has blood, which tests both for her DNA and DNA that also matches Caitlin Morrison. Additionally they find fibers consistent with clothing, a shirt-sweater Caitlin Morrison was wearing when this incident occurred.

Would this be as RDI like Trasha Griffith would say, not a scintilla of evidence that Caitlin Morrison did NOT sexually assault the 4year old girl?

What would be an objective scientific standard that states that such DNA is evidence Caitlin Morrison sexually assaulted a 4 year old girl, but the same evidence is not evidence of an intruder?

Catitlin Morrison 26

does show that there are female on young girl (lesbian) pedophiles, who fantasize about inserting their finger into little girl's vaginas, and that such a sex act is something that is on their mind, it is an urge, that they wish to consummate. Caitlin Morrison saw a 4 year old girl, she had time alone with her and acted on an urge to have sexual contact with her vagina.

Jonbenet Ramsey is dead and they found injuries and bleeding from her vagina. Is it really so surprising that a sexual predator --intruder-- took interest in Jonbenet, and part of that fantasy involves contact with her vagina?

Inspectorrex once said he didn't think Jonbenet Ramsey was the target of a sexual predator, which i claimed it was on crimeshots, bc there wasn't enough damage. Roy23 then chipped in and agreed with me that sexual gratification can take many forms.

Caitlin Morrison is one specific instance in which the sexual contact consisted of a finger insertion into the vagina by a woman into a young girl. Sexual gratification does not necessarily invovle violent forceful penetration of a penis thrusting into a vagina, causing massive damage.